Commentary for Kiddushin 114:14
אלא אמר אביי מהכא (ויקרא ג, ב) ושחטו (ויקרא ג, ח) ושחט אותו (ויקרא ג, יג) ושחט אותו תלתא קראי יתירי מה תלמוד לומר
e hullin] in thine [i.e., without the Temple]: just as mine [slaughtered] in thine is forbidden,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The consecrated animal is forbidden while yet alive, and becomes permitted through the sprinkling of its blood on the altar, which is absent if it is not killed in the Temple. The prohibition, dating from while it is alive, is naturally of benefit in general.');"><sup>24</sup></span> so is thine [slaughtered] in mine forbidden. If so, just as thine in mine is punished by kareth,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');"><sup>25</sup></span>
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
Abaye derives the rule that one cannot derive benefit from non-sacred animals slaughtered in the Temple from the repetition of the same word, “it” in three verses. What do we learn from the repetition of this word? The answer will become clearer as we proceed.
The baraita begins with the verse which allows one to slaughter non-sacrificial animals when far away from the Temple. But one is not allowed to slaughter non-sacrificial animals inside the Temple.
The baraita begins with the verse which allows one to slaughter non-sacrificial animals when far away from the Temple. But one is not allowed to slaughter non-sacrificial animals inside the Temple.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy